Commissioner of Social Services ex rel. Rolle v. Murphy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Commissioner of Social Services ex rel. Rolle v. Murphy

254 A.D.2d 285, 678 N.Y.S.2d 271, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10014

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 5, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 254 A.D.2d 285 (Commissioner of Social Services ex rel. Rolle v. Murphy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Commissioner of Social Services ex rel. Rolle v. Murphy, 254 A.D.2d 285, 678 N.Y.S.2d 271, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10014 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Medowar, J.), dated January 28, 1997, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Miller, H.E.), dated October 15, 1996, which, after a hearing, directed him to pay $48 per week in child support.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We reject the father’s contention that the amount of child support set by the Hearing Examiner is onerous and against the weight of the evidence. Great deference should be given to the determination of the Hearing Examiner, who was in the best position to hear and evaluate the evidence as well as the credibility of the witnesses, and whose primary goal was to make a determination based upon the best interests of the child (see, Matter of Tyler v Minott, 206 AD2d 537; Matter of [286]*286Maddox v Doty, 186 AD2d 135). Based on the testimony and the evidence presented, we find that the Hearing Examiner properly set the amount of child support, which amount was actually lower than the guidelines established by the Child Support Standards Act (Family Ct Act § 413). Mangano, P. J., Joy, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In a proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Medowar, J.), dated January 28, 1997, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Miller, H.E.), dated October 15, 1996, which, after a hearing, directed him to pay $48 per week in child support.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We reject the father’s contention that the amount of child support set by the Hearing Examiner is onerous and against the weight of the evidence. Great deference should be given to the determination of the Hearing Examiner, who was in the best position to hear and evaluate the evidence as well as the credibility of the witnesses, and whose primary goal was to make a determination based upon the best interests of the child (see, Matter of Tyler v Minott, 206 AD2d 537; Matter of [286]*286Maddox v Doty, 186 AD2d 135). Based on the testimony and the evidence presented, we find that the Hearing Examiner properly set the amount of child support, which amount was actually lower than the guidelines established by the Child Support Standards Act (Family Ct Act § 413). Mangano, P. J., Joy, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D.2d 285, 678 N.Y.S.2d 271, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10014, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commissioner-of-social-services-ex-rel-rolle-v-murphy-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack